4 Thoughts After Game 1 of the Indiana Pacers, Miami Heat Eastern Semifinal

The Eastern Conference semifinal is between more than just the Miami Heat and the Indiana Pacers. It is a duel between two different ideologies.

There is the Heat's—sign superstars and assemble a cast of role players that let the stars shine. Then there is the Pacers' ideology—build carefully through the draft with a very traditional Hoosier idea that the team is greater than the sum of its parts. It is the superstar vs. the team.

The superstar(s) won Game 1 95-86. But it was much closer than the score showed. And, as is par for the course with close games, there are numerous storylines that follow.

As your writer, I have selected four thoughts for you to dissect and consider. If you're a good reader, there might be a bonus thought for you at the end. Because...that's the generous thing, I suppose.

1. Nice to See LeBron and Wade Show Up

Much like the first-row seats at American Airlines Arena, it took LeBron James and Dwyane Wade a while to realize, "Oh hey, they're playing in the playoffs."

The duo combined for six field goals in the first half while playing timidly.

James, especially, almost refused to take Danny Granger off the dribble and attack the lane. He settled for jump shots and didn't seem involved in the offense.

The second half was a different story.

Wade and James attacked. They would go on to hit 14 field goals and went 14-of-14 from the free-throw line.

Wade set the tone for the second half by driving the entire third quarter. James followed suit, like when he took advantage of Roy Hibbert with his drive/reverse layup combo with 9:24 left in the third.

Wade and James finished with 29 and 32 points respectively. Wade's game was more balanced; he had 13 in the first half and 16 in the second. James poured in 26 of his 32 points in the second. Really good but not an even game.

For the rest of the series they will need more balanced play, because of...

2. Bosh's Injured Abdomen and Roy Hibbert

The Heat have a big problem. A 7'2" problem, to be precise.

Miami is not well disposed to accommodate a major injury to the Big Three.

Now, Miami's depth will be put to the test.

During the first half, Bosh and Hibbert cancelled each other out. At the time of Bosh's abdominal injury, they both had 13 points and about the same rebounds. 

But now that Bosh is out, who is going to guard Hibbert?

Miami is now left with Udonis Haslem, Joel Anthony and Ronny Turiaf, none of which match up well with the quickness of Hibbert.

Then, if you throw in the Pacers' interior depth with David West, Tyler Hansbrough and Lou Amundson, the Heat will have to defend an active Pacers frontcourt with only three average big men.

One intriguing option is the Heat looking to play James on West, which will open up Haslem/Anthony/Turiaf to focus on Hibbert. But who's guarding Hibbert is only the peak of the problem.

Bosh's injury also means the Pacers can focus their defense, even more on the trapping of Wade and James, trying to keep them out of the middle even more now that their interior scoring threat in Bosh's 18 points per game is gone.

The combination of Haslem/Anthony/Turiaf was not a proficient scoring combination. They averaged 4.3 per game individually and 13 per game combined.

While rebounding won't be a problem, finding the extra scoring will be. Unless Wade and James go for 70 per game, someone is going to have to pick up their scoring output.

The scoring is one problem, but maybe not as much as having an unchecked Roy Hibbert, who was a defensive monster against Orlando, roaming in the paint.

3. Granger and George Need to Play Offense

They don't need to outplay Wade and James, but they do need to have a noticeable impact on the game.

Danny Granger and Paul George, Indiana's starting wing players, only scored a combined 15 points. That is dreadful.

Especially for Granger, the Pacers' leading scorer. He averaged 19 a game and needs to hit around that average for the Pacers to upset the Heat.

George had some very noticeable decision-making failures, twice costing the Pacers two easy buckets inside.

He has been inconsistent, a normal fault of many young players in the NBA, but George doesn't have that luxury. If he can contribute, the Pacers transform from a post-oriented team into a versatile, flowing offense.

Both Granger and George's defense is severely important, but if they offer little offense, the Pacers will be in trouble.

4. Flops and Fouls

Pacers coach Frank Vogel raised some flopping questions before Game 1.

After Game 1, flopping wasn't much of an issue.

The most noticeable non-call for flopping was when Mike Miller plummeted backwards when Leandro Barbosa drove the lane in the mid-second quarter.

Over the course of the game, there were some questionable calls. There was a phantom foul for Hibbert on James and a charge that Miller took in the third, but overall there weren't that many absurd foul calls.

There were, however, three noticeable trends.

First, lots of non-calls. The officials were allowing a lot of physical play, especially in the post.

Second, charges were being called. The most noticeable were Paul George taking a charge on LeBron James and Mario Chalmers taking one a mid-court on George Hill.

Third, the foul disparity. nine more fouls were called on Indiana than Miami. Midway through the third it was more drastic—13 more fouls were called on the Pacers than the Heat.

And if you combined the fouls called on Wade and James, you would get a whopping one.

Those numbers show that James and Wade are very hard to guard and that the Pacers—read Granger—need to be more aggressive in attacking the lane. Hill and George need to avoid unnecessary fouls.

Bonus Thought: Props to the Clippers and Grizzles

Do you remember the NBA circa 1996?

There were two certainties in the league. One was that Michael Jordan was going to win the title if he wanted to—which he did.

The second was that the Los Angeles Clippers and the Vancouver (Memphis) Grizzles were going to stink like a skunk on the side of the highway.

They were horrible. Awful. Terrible. The adjectives could go on.

So I had a very Twilight Zone-like moment when I was watching their Game 7 on Sunday. I thought to myself, "How in the hell did the Clippers and the Grizzles make the playoffs?"

Now I know the Grizzles had a really good season last year and were even picked as contenders this year. I know that the Clippers were made vogue when Blake Griffin started dunking in new and exciting ways and that they became contenders when Chris Paul was traded to them. They are two very good clubs.

But for I moment there, I found myself remembering the two franchises from 16 years ago. And I promise you that the Bryant Reeves-led Grizzles and the...the..."whoever played for the Clippers"-led Clippers would not have met anywhere remotely close to the Western Conference playoffs.

It's really a testament to how far both teams have come in the last 15 years. Both organizations had wonderful seasons, although I'm sure the Grizzles are rather disappointed in their finish—and that is a good thing.

The Grizzles of old would have been pleased just making the playoffs. Those days, of course, are in the past.